Full text of "Flammulated owl surveys on the Big Timber, Bozeman, Gardiner, and Livingston Ranger Districts of the Custer Gallatin National Forest : 2013"

See other formats

Flammulated Owl Surveys on the Big Timber,
Bozeman, Gardiner, and Livingston Ranger Districts
of the Custer Gallatin National Forest: 2013

Prepared for:

Custer-Gallatin National Forest

Prepared by:

Bryce A. Maxell

Montana Natural Heritage Program

a cooperative program of the
Montana State Library and the University of Montana

March 2016

Natural Heritage
Program

Flammulated Owl Surveys on the Big Timber,
Bozeman, Gardiner, and Livingston Ranger Districts
of the Custer Gallatin National Forest: 2013

Prepared for:

Custer Gallatin National Forest
10 East Babcock
Bozeman, MT 59771

Agreement Numbers:
09-CS-11015600-054

Prepared by:
Bryce A. Maxell

O N T A N A

,tate
rary

Natural Heritage
Program

The University of

t Jr Montana

P.O. Box 201800 • 1515 East Sixth Avenue • Helena, MT 59620-1800 • 406-444-3290

This document should be cited as follows:

Maxell, B.A. 2016. Flammulated Owl surveys on the Big Timber, Bozeman, Gardiner, and Livingston
Ranger Districts of the Custer Gallatin National Forest: 2013. Report to Custer Gallatin National
Forest. Montana Natural Fleritage Program, Flelena, Montana 27 pp. plus appendices.

Executive Summary

The Forest Service contracted with the
Montana Natural Heritage Program to conduct
surveys for Flammulated Owl (Psiloscops
flammeolus) on the Big Timber, Bozeman,
Gardiner, and Livingston Ranger Districts in June
of 2013 to inform forest and project planning
efforts for this Montana Species of Concern and
Forest Service Sensitive Species. The major
goals were to: (1) provide more widespread
baseline survey coverage for Flammulated Owl
in drier conifer forest types; and (2) record
observations of all other species detected
incidentally while in each management unit.

We identified fourteen focal areas across the
five districts that had relatively larger areas of
four potentially suitable Flammulated Owl
habitat types that we could target for call
playback surveys.

We conducted a total of 128 call station surveys
on 12 survey routes, including four that
overlapped spatially with routes surveyed
previously in 2005. We failed to detect any
Flammulated Owls during our surveys and only
had seven detections of three owl species
across all of our survey efforts: Western
Screech-Owl was detected once on the Hebgen

Lake District; Northern Saw-whet Owl was
detected twice on the Hebgen Lake District and
once on the Big Timber District; and Great
Horned Owl was detected once on the Hebgen
Lake District and twice on the Livingston
District. Given these survey results, the small
number of records reported for the species east
of the upper Missouri River, and only 5
observation records in 3 widespread locations
on the Bozeman, Livingston, and Hebgen Lake
Districts, it seems likely that the species is either
largely absent, or occurs at very low densities,
on these districts. We recommend that future
surveys for the species only be conducted in
areas where forest management projects are
being considered in highly suitable Flammulated
Owl habitat.

During the course of our surveys we detected
three Montana Species of Concern (Western
Toad; Great Blue Heron, and Brewer's Sparrow)
and two Potential Montana Species of Concern
(Western Screech-Owl and Silver-haired Bat).
Finally, we recorded 97 additional observations
of 42 species that are not Montana Species of
Concern.

Acknowledgements

This project would not have been possible
without grants administered by the Custer
Gallatin National Forest and Region One Office
of the U.S. Forest Service. Jodie Canfield and
Courtney Frost recognized the importance of
gathering additional survey information for
Flammulated Owls on the Big Timber, Bozeman,
Gardiner, and Livingston Ranger Districts, set up
contract modifications, provided forest stand
information, and gave feedback on project
implementation and survey prioritization. Scott
Spaulding, Teresa Asleson, and Teresa Johnson
assisted with contract management at the

Region 1 Office of the U.S. Forest Service. Matt
Bell created a mapset for suitable Flammulated
Owl habitat that could be loaded onto GPS units
and used to guide call station locations while in
the field. Megan Fylling and Kristina Smucker
with the Avian Science Center provided
Flammulated Owl call sound files for conducting
the surveys. At the Montana Natural Fleritage
Program, Erin Fairbank assisted with surveys,
Darlene Patzer assisted with grant
administration, and Scott Blum assisted with
data entry.

This project was supported by an agreement between the Region One Office of the U.S. Forest Service,
the Custer Gallatin National Forest, and the Montana Natural Fleritage Program, a cooperative program
of the Montana State Library and the University of Montana (09-CS-11015600-054).

Table of Contents

Introduction. 1

Project need. 1

Objectives. 1

Methods . 2

Selection of Survey Areas. 2

Sampling Procedure. 2

Storage and Availability of Data. 3

Results and Recommendations . 4

Literature Cited . 5

List of Figures

Figure 1. Administrative units on the Hebgen Lake, Bozeman, Livingston, Big Timber, and Gardiner

Districts of the Custer Gallatin National Forest. 6

Figure 2. Statewide Flammulated Owl observations, call surveys conducted prior to 2013 by

others, and call surveys conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Heritage Program. 7

Figure 3. Flammulated Owl observations, call surveys conducted prior to 2013 by others, and call
surveys conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Heritage Program on the Hebgen
Lake, Bozeman, Livingston, Big Timber, and Gardiner Ranger Districts. 8

Figure 4. Focal survey areas identified across the the Hebgen Lake, Bozeman, Livingston, Big

Timber, and Gardiner Ranger Districts. 9

Figure 5. Focal survey area 1, Upper Sixteen Mile Road and Shields River Road on the Livingston

District. 10

Figure 6. Focal survey area 2, Cottonwood Creek and Rock Creek Roads on the Livingston District... 11

Figure 7. Focal survey area 3, Big Timber Creek Road on the Big Timber District. 12

Figure 8. Focal survey area 4, Flathead Pass Road on the Bozeman District. 13

Figure 9. Focal survey area 5, Bridger Canyon, Bracken Creek, and Jackson Creek Roads on the

Bozeman District. 14

Figure 10. Focal survey area 6, Mill Creek Road on the Livingston District. 15

Figure 11. Focal survey area 7, Jardine Road along Bear Creek on the Gardiner District. 16

Figure 12. Focal survey area 8, Main Boulder River Road on the Big Timber District. 17

Figure 13. Focal survey area 9, Upper Gallatin River Canyon, Taylor Creek, and Big Sky Spur Roads

on the Bozeman District. 18

Figure 14. Focal survey area 10, Storm Castle Road on the Bozeman District. 19

Figure 15. Focal survey area 11, Quake Lake and Beaver Creek Road on the Hebgen Lake District. 20

Figure 16. Focal survey area 12, south Hebgen Lake area and Denny Creek Road on Hebgen Lake

District. 21

Figure 17. Focal survey area 13, Mulherin Creek and Cottonwood Creek Roads on Gardiner District... 22

Figure 18. Focal survey area 14, North Bridger Creek Road on the Big Timber District. 23

List of Tables

Table 1. Flammulated Owl detections on the Hebgen Lake, Bozeman, and Livingston Ranger

Districts. 24

Table 2. Summary of Flammulated Owl Call survey efforts, owl, and other species detections on
the Hebgen Lake, Bozeman, Livingston, Big Timber, and Gardiner Ranger Districts in

2013 by the Montana Natural Heritage Program. 25

Table 3. Species detected, and numbers of unique spatial observations, on the Big Timber,

Gardiner, Hebgen Lake, and Livingston Districts during 2013. 26

Appendices

Appendix A

Heritage Program Ranks: definitions for global and state conservation status ranks and Montana
Species of Cocnern and Potential Species of Concern.A 1-4

Introduction

Project Need

The Forest Service is required by the National
Forest Management Act to maintain a diversity
of plant and animal species and accomplishes
this, in part, through the enactment and
revision of forest plans (NFMA 1976). The
Custer Gallatin National Forest is currently
initiating a forest plan revision. As part of this
revision, the Forest Service must: (1) identify
and assess available information for threated,
endangered, proposed, and candidate species
and potential species of conservation concern
present in the plan area (36 CFR 219.6); and (2)
select monitoring indicators that measure the
effectiveness of plan components designed to
maintain or restore the ecological conditions
and key ecosystem characteristics necessary to
provide for diversity of plant and animal
communities and contribute to the recovery of,
conserve, or maintain the viability of at risk
species within the plan area (36 CFR 219.12).

The Flammulated Owl (Psiloscops flammeolus)
is a small insectivorous neotropical migrant that
is currently listed as a Montana Species of
Concern and a U.S. Forest Service Sensitive
Species (USFS 2011, Linkhart and Mccallum
2013, MTNHP & MTFWP 2016). The species is
associated with mature and old-growth xeric
Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir stands with large
snags and a generally more open structure, but
with understory thickets for roosting and
singing, and the presence of abundant moths
and beetles (Wright 1996, Wright et al. 1997,
Linkhart and Mccallum 2013).

In May, June, and July of 2005, the Avian
Science Center conducted call playback surveys
for Flammulated Owl across Region 1 Forests in

Montana, northern Idaho, and northwest South
Dakota (Cilimburg 2006). These surveys
detected Flammulated Owl on 29 percent of the
265 transects and 9 percent of the 2,695 points
that were surveyed across Region 1. Flowever,
they failed to detect Flammulated Owls east of
111.5 west longitude, with no detections on the
Custer Gallatin National Forest or the former
Lewis & Clark National Forest (Cilimburg 2006,
MTNFIP 2016). These results are consistent
with the failure to detect the species with
certainty on the Livingston Ranger District of
the Custer Gallatin National Forest during
previous survey efforts (Brelsford 1992) and the
small number of records for the species east of
the upper Missouri River, with only 5 records in
3 widespread locations on the Bozeman,
Livingston, and Flebgen Lake Districts (MBDC
2012, MTNHP 2016, Figures 1-3, Table 1).

Objectives

Given the Sensitive status of Flammulated Owl,
their presence in commercially important
timber stands in other portions of Region 1, and
the lack of baseline survey effort for the species
on the Hebgen Lake, Bozeman, Livingston, Big
Timber, and Gardiner Districts of the Custer
Gallatin National Forest, the Forest Service
contracted with the Montana Natural Heritage
Program to conduct call playback surveys for
the species during June of 2013. The major
goals of this survey effort were to: (1) provide
more widespread baseline survey coverage for
Flammulated Owl in drier conifer forest types;
and (2) record observations of all other species
detected incidentally while in each
management unit.

Methods

Selection of Survey Areas

Following Smucker et al. (2008), we identified
potential Flammulated Owl habitat to target for
call surveys using Region 1 U.S. Forest Service
Vegetation Mapping. We defined primary
habitat as Ponderosa Pine, Dougias-fir, or other
shade-intolerant tree species with tree sizes of
>15 inches diameter at breast height (DBH) and
canopy cover <40%. We defined secondary
habitat as Ponderosa Pine, Dougias-fir, or other
shade-intolerant tree species with tree size >10
inches DBFI, south-facing slopes, and canopy
cover <25%. We then subdivided both the
primary and secondary habitats by areas that
occurred within 500 meters of roads and areas
that occurred more than 500 meters from
roads. Visual examination of these four
potentially suitable Flammulated Owl habitat
types in the GIS across the Hebgen Lake,
Bozeman, Livingston, Big Timber, and Gardiner
Ranger Districts resulted in the identification of
14 focal survey areas with larger areas of
potentially suitable habitat to target for survey
(Figure 4). We developed a mapset of these
four potentially suitable Flammulated Owl
habitat types and loaded it onto Garmin GPS
units so that the areas could be easily targeted
for survey in the dark.

Sampling Procedure

We conducted call playback surveys between
17 June and 27 June during the incubation
period for Flammulated Owls when detection
probabilities were likely to be at their highest
and followed standardized protocols that have
previously been used across Region 1 Forests
(Cilimburg 2006, Barnes and Belthoff 2008,
Smucker et al. 2008, Fylling et al. 2010). Each

evening we initiated surveys at least 30 minutes
after sunset, but moonlight illumination did
vary across our sampling period and across
survey routes and moon illumination was very
bright during some of our surveys. Call stations
along road survey routes were separated by a
minimum distance of 500 meters, but were
often separated by much larger distances in
order to locate all call stations near potentially
suitable Flammulated Owl habitat types
(Figures 5-18).

At each call station, we used FoxPro NX3 game
callers loaded with adult territorial calls and
broadcast them at full volume from the
megaphone end of the caller. In the field under
calm conditions, calls could be heard at
distances of 200+ meters. At each call station,
an initial two-minute silent listening period was
followed by four rounds of 30 seconds of calls
(7.5 seconds in each of the 4 cardinal directions)
and 90 seconds of silent listening. Thus, there
were a sum total of 10 minutes of calls and
silence at each call station, broken down as
follows with seconds of calls shown in bold and
seconds of silence shown in normal font: 120-
30-90-30-90-30-90-30-90.

Throughout the time spent at each call station,
observers stayed vigilant to detect territorial
owl calls or other animal sounds. When an owl
responded with territorial calls, surveyors
recorded the bearing and estimated the
distance to the calls. During periods of silence
observers also recorded birds and other animal
species detected aurally or visually. Surveyors
also recorded locations of animals detected
incidentally while driving or camping.

A GPS unit was used to navigate to each call
station and record the exact location surveyed.
Time of survey initiation was recorded at each
call station and moon phase (day since new
moon) and visibility (yes or no) and weather
conditions were noted. Sky conditions were
recorded as: 0 = <30% cloud cover; 1 = 30-70%
cloud cover; 2 = >70% cloud cover; 3 = visibility
impaired beyond 30 meters; 4 = light drizzle; 5 =
constant snow; 6 = constant rain. Wind
conditions were recorded as: 0 = smoke rises
vertically (<1 mph); 1 = wind direction shown by
smoke drift (1-3 mph); 2 = leaves rustle, breeze
felt on face (4-7 mph); 3 = leaves and small
twigs in constant motion (8-12 mph); 4 = raises
dust, small branches in motion (13-17 mph; and
5 = small trees sway (18-24 mph). Noise
conditions were recorded as: 0 = no noise; 1 =
some noise, but can hear very well; 2 =
moderate noise with distant birds tough to

hear, but can still hear within 200 meters; 3 =
loud noise affecting ability to detect most birds;
and 4 = very loud stream or other noise making
it difficult to hear anything at all. No surveys
were conducted during sky conditions of 4-6,
wind conditions of 4 or 5, or noise conditions of
4.

Storage & Availability of Data

All Flammulated Owl call playback survey
information and locations of detections of
animals during surveys or made incidentally are
stored in databases at the Montana Natural
Heritage Program in the Montana State Library
in Helena and are made available online
through the Montana Natural Heritage
Program's MapViewer so that it is integrated
with other survey and incidental observation
data and more readily available for forest and
project-level planning efforts
http://mtnhp.org/mapviewer/

Results & Recommendations

We conducted a total of 128 call station surveys
on 12 survey routes across the Hebgen Lake,
Bozeman, Livingston, Big Timber, and Gardiner
Ranger Districts (Table 2, Figures 5-18).
Unfortunately, weather conditions precluded
survey of focal area 4, the Flathead Pass Road
on the Bozeman District in the vicinity of three
previous Flammulated Owl detections (Figure 8,
Tables 1 & 2), focal area 14, the North Bridger
Creek Road on the Big Timber District (Figure
18), and a large portion of focal area 8 along the
Main Boulder River Road on the Big Timber
District (Figure 12). Four of the 12 routes
surveyed overlapped spatially with routes
surveyed in 2005 by the Avian Science Center
(Cilimburg 2006). These include focal area 1,
the Upper Shields River Road on the Livingston
District (Figure 5), focal area 2, the Cottonwood
Creek Road on the Livingston District (Figure 6),
focal area 6, the Mill Creek Road on the
Livingston District (Figure 10), and focal area 10,
the Storm Castle Road on the Bozeman District
(Figure 14).

We failed to detect any Flammulated Owls
during our surveys and only had seven
detections of three owl species across all of our
survey efforts: Western Screech-Owl was
detected once on the Flebgen Lake District;
Northern Saw-whet Owl was detected twice on
the Flebgen Lake District and once on the Big
Timber District; and Great Florned Owl was
detected once on the Flebgen Lake District and
twice on the Livingston District (Tables 2 & 3).
Relatively cold weather occurred during some

of our surveys; 73 (57%) of 128 call stations had
start temperatures that were less than 50 °F (10
°C). Flowever, it seems more likely that our
results are simply consistent with other
Flammulated Owl survey efforts on the Custer
Gallatin National Forest that failed to detect the
species during time periods when they should
have been detectable (Brelsford 1992,

Cilimburg 2006). Given these survey results, the
small number of records reported for the
species east of the upper Missouri River, and
only 5 observation records in 3 widespread
locations on the Bozeman, Livingston, and
Hebgen Lake Districts (MBDC 2012, MTNHP
2016, Figures 1-3, Table 1), it seems likely that
the species is either largely absent or occurs at
very low densities on these districts. We
recommend that future surveys only be
conducted in areas where forest management
projects are being considered in highly suitable
Flammulated Owl habitat.

During the course of our surveys we detected
three Montana Species of Concern: 3
observations of Western Toad; 3 observations
of Great Blue Heron, 1 observation of Brewer's
Sparrow (Table 2, Appendix A). We also
detected two Potential Montana Species of
Concern: 1 observation of Western Screech-Owl
and 1 observation of Silver-haired Bat (Table 2,
Appendix A). Finally, we recorded 97 additional
observations of 42 species that are not
Montana Species of Concern (Tables 2 & 3).

Literature Cited

Barnes, K.P. and J.R. Belthoff. 2008. Probability
of detection of Flammulated Owls using
nocturnal broadcast surveys. Journal of Field
Ornithology 79(3):321-328.

Brelsford, M. 1992. Boreal Owl (Aegolius
funereus) and Flammulated Owl {Otus
flammeolus) survey results for the Livingston
District of the Gallatin National Forest.

Report to the Gallatin National Forest.
Montana Natural Fleritage Program. Flelena,
MT. 22 pp.

[CFR] Code of Federal Regulations. Title 36.
Chapter II. Part 219. Subpart A. Sections 219.6
and 219.12

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/CFR-
2012-title36-vol2/CFR-2012-title36-vol2
Accessed February 2016.

Cilimburg, A. 2006. 2005 Flammulated Owl
surveys: final report. Avian Science Center,
Division of Biological Sciences, University of
Montana. Missoula, MT. 17 p.

Fylling, M.A., J.D. Carlisle, A.B. Cilimburg, J.A.
Blakesley, B.D. Linkhart, and D.W. Holt. 2010.
Flammulated Owl Survey Protocol. Partners
in Flight Western Working Group. 10 p.

Linkhart, B.D. and D.A. Mccallum. 2013.
Flammulated Owl (Psiloscops flammeolus).

The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole,
Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology;
Retrieved from Birds of North America Online:
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/093

doi:10.2173/bna.93

[MBDC] Montana Bird Distribution Committee.
2012. P.D. Skaar's Montana Bird Distribution,
7 th Edition. Montana Audubon. Helena, MT
208 pp + foldout map.

[MTNHP] Montana Natural Heritage Program.
2016. Animal point observation and

structured survey databases. Montana
Natural Heritage Program. Helena, MT.
Accessed March 2016.

[MTNHP & MTFWP] Montana Natural Heritage
Program and Montana Fish, Wildlife and
Parks. 2016. Montana Animal Species of
Concern Report. Retrieved on 3/3/2016.
http://mtnhp.org/SpeciesOfConcern/?AorP=a

[NFMA] National Forest Management Act.

1976. United States Code. Title 16, Chapter 3.
http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/includes/RP

A amended by NFMA USCver.pdf Accessed
February 2016.

Smucker, K., A. Cilimburg, and M. Fylling. 2008.
2008 Flammulated Owl surveys: final report.
Avian Science Center, Division of Biological
Sciences, University of Montana. Missoula,
MT. 24 p.

[USFS] U.S. Forest Service Region 1. 2011.
Sensitive Species List. Missoula, MT. 5 p.
http://www.fs.usda.gov/lnternet/FSE DOCU

MENTS/stelprdb5130553.pdf Accessed
February 2016.

Wright, V. 1996. Multi-scale analysis of
Flammulated Owl habitat use: owl
distribution, habitat management, and
conservation. M.Sc. Thesis. University of
Montana. Missoula, MT. 92 p.

Wright, V., S.J. Hejl, and R.L. Hutto. 1997.
Conservation implications of a multi-scale
study of Flammulated Owl (Otus flammeolus)
habitat use in the northern Rocky Mountains,
USA. Pp. 506-516 in J.R. Duncan, D.H.
Johnson, and T.H. Nicholls, eds. Biology and
conservation of owls of the Northern
Hemisphere. Second International
Symposium. U.S.D.A. Forest Service General
Technical Report NC-190. North Central
Research Station, St. Paul, MN.

Figure 1. Administrative units on the Hebgen Lake, Bozeman, Livingston, Big Timber, and Gardiner Districts of the Custer
Gallatin National Forest.

Figure 2. Statewide Flammulated Owl observations (yellow stars), call surveys conducted prior to 2013 by others (blue circles), and call surveys conducted in
2013 by the Montana Natural Heritage Program (red circles) statewide.

DANIELS

SHERIDAN

TOOLE

LIBERTY

BLAINE

VALLEY

PHILLIPS

PONDERA

RICHLAND

CHOUTEAU

TETON

MCCONE

DAWSON

GARFIELD

FERGUS

••

!\S & CLARK

PETROLEUM

IITH BASIN

WIBAUX

PRAIRIE

POWELL

MEAGHEFf

MUSSELSHELL

GRAN I

WHEATLAND

FALLON

LDEN VALLEY

TREASURE 1

CUSTER

ROSEBUD

YELLOWSTONE

SWEET GRASS

STILL-WATER

CARTER

BIG HORN

>WDER RIVER

MADISON

Figure 3. Flammulated Owl observations (yellow stars), call surveys conducted prior to 2013 by others (blue circles),
and call surveys conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Heritage Program (red circles) on the Hebgen
Lake, Bozeman, Livingston, Big Timber, and Gardiner Ranger Districts.

Figure 4. Focal survey areas identified across the the Hebgen Lake, Bozeman, Livingston, Big Timber, and Gardiner

Ranger Districts (purple stars). Primary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark green), primary habitat more
than 500 meters from a road (light green), secondary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark orange), and
secondary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light orange).

■RD

Figure 5. Focal survey area 1, Upper Sixteen Mile Road and Shields River Road on the Livingston District. Flammulated
Owl observations (yellow star), call surveys conducted prior to 2013 by others (blue circles), and call surveys
conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Fleritage Program (red circles). Primary habitat within 500 meters
of a road (dark green), primary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light green), secondary habitat
within 500 meters of a road (dark orange), and secondary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light
orange).

Figure 6. Focal survey area 2, Cottonwood Creek and Rock Creek Roads on the Livingston District. Call surveys
conducted prior to 2013 by others (blue circles), and call surveys conducted in 2013 by the Montana
Natural Heritage Program (red circles). Primary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark green), primary
habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light green), secondary habitat within 500 meters of a road
(dark orange), and secondary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light orange).

Figure 7. Focal survey area 3, Big Timber Creek Road on the Big Timber District. Flammulated Owl call surveys

conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Fleritage Program (red circles). Primary habitat within 500 meters
of a road (dark green), primary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light green), secondary habitat
within 500 meters of a road (dark orange), and secondary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light
orange).

Figure 8. Focal survey area 4, Flathead Pass Road on the Bozeman District. Flammulated Owl observations (yellow star)
and call surveys conducted prior to 2013 by others (blue circles). Call surveys were not conducted in 2013 by
the Montana Natural Fleritage Program due to a storm. Primary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark
green), primary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light green), secondary habitat within 500 meters
of a road (dark orange), and secondary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light orange).

v>.-L

Figure 9. Focal survey area 5, Bridger Canyon, Bracken Creek, and Jackson Creek Roads on the Bozeman District.

Flammulated Owl call surveys conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Fleritage Program (red circles).
Primary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark green), primary habitat more than 500 meters from a road
(light green), secondary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark orange), and secondary habitat more than
500 meters from a road (light orange).

v /

4 *

Figure 10. Focal survey area 6, Mill Creek Road on the Livingston District. Flammulated Owl call surveys conducted prior
to 2013 by others (blue circles) and call surveys conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Fleritage Program
(red circles). Primary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark green), primary habitat more than 500 meters
from a road (light green), secondary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark orange), and secondary habitat
more than 500 meters from a road (light orange).

Figure 11. Focal survey area 7, Jardine Road along Bear Creek on the Gardiner District. Flammulated Owl call surveys

Figure 12. Focal survey area 8, Main Boulder River Road on the Big Timber District. Flammulated Owl call surveys

conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Fleritage Program (red circles). Surveys were terminated early as
a result of high winds. Primary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark green), primary habitat more than
500 meters from a road (light green), secondary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark orange), and
secondary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light orange).

Figure 13. Focal survey area 9, Upper Gallatin River Canyon, Taylor Creek, and Big Sky Spur Roads on the Bozeman
District. Flammulated Owl call surveys conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Fleritage Program (red
circles). Primary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark green), primary habitat more than 500 meters
from a road (light green), secondary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark orange), and secondary habitat
more than 500 meters from a road (light orange).

Figure 14. Focal survey area 10, Storm Castle Road on the Bozeman District. Flammulated Owl call surveys conducted
prior to 2013 by others (blue circles) and call surveys conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Fleritage
Program (red circles). Primary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark green), primary habitat more than
500 meters from a road (light green), secondary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark orange), and
secondary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light orange).

Figure 15. Focal survey area 11, Quake Lake and Beaver Creek Road on the Hebgen Lake District. Flammulated Owl call
surveys conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Heritage Program (red circles). Primary habitat within
500 meters of a road (dark green), primary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light green),
secondary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark orange), and secondary habitat more than 500 meters
from a road (light orange).

Figure 16. Focal survey area 12, south Hebgen Lake area and Denny Creek Road on Hebgen Lake District. Flammulated
Owl call surveys conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Fleritage Program (red circles). Primary habitat
within 500 meters of a road (dark green), primary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light green),
secondary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark orange), and secondary habitat more than 500 meters
from a road (light orange).

Figure 17. Focal survey area 13, Mulherin Creek and Cottonwood Creek Roads on Gardiner District. Flammulated Owl
call surveys conducted in 2013 by the Montana Natural Fleritage Program (red circles). Primary habitat
within 500 meters of a road (dark green), primary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light green),
secondary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark orange), and secondary habitat more than 500 meters
from a road (light orange).

Figure 18. Focal survey area 14, North Bridger Creek Road on the Big Timber District. No Flammulated Owl call surveys
were performed in 2013 due to poor weather conditions. Primary habitat within 500 meters of a road (dark
green), primary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light green), secondary habitat within 500 meters
of a road (dark orange), and secondary habitat more than 500 meters from a road (light orange).

Table 1. Flammulated Owl detections on the Hebgen Lake, Bozeman, and Livingston Ranger Districts. See MBDC (2012) for descriptions of
observation (obs) type.

Date Range

Location

Observer

Obs

Type

Comments

No. Adults

No. Juvs

7/27/1993

Bozeman District
Johnson Canyon, E of
canyon mouth where
road cuts ridgeline

Atkinson, Eric

Two begging fledglings and one adult male responded to territorial hoot from
observer. Fledglings below road in dense pole/mature doug fir stand canopy 40 feet
with 85% closure with vaccinium, maple and columbine understory. Male above
road in open mature doug fir stand canopy 45-50 feet with 40% closure with brome,
lupine and columbine understory (more details on form).

8/8/1993

Bozeman District
Johnson Canyon, E of
canyon mouth where
road cuts ridgeline

Atkinson, Eric

Observer reports a male owl 'sang one complete song 1 during visit to measure
habitat for observations of 7/27 (BirdJD 18824 and 407853). Fledglings below road
in dense pole/mature doug fir stand - canopy 40 feet with 85% closure - with
vaccinium, maple and columbine understory. Male above road in open mature doug
fir stand - canopy 45-50 feet with 40% closure - with brome, lupine and columbine
understory (more details on form for 7/27).

7/27/1993

Bozeman District
Johnson Canyon, W of
canyon mouth

Atkinson, Eric

One begging fledgling and one adult male responded to territorial hoot from
observer. Fledgling in thick, mature doug fir stand - canopy 40 feet with 70% closure
- with houndstongue, brome, timothy and aster ground cover. Male in open
meadow ringed by mature, tall doug fir - canopy 75 feet with 15% closure - with
mixed grass/forb ground cover (more details on form).

6/2/1992

Livingston District

Buck Creek area, Upper
Shields River

Fouse, Fred

Two birds observed.

7/7/1994

Hebgen Lake District
Landbird Monitoring
Program PointID 6009

Avian Science

Center

Species observation data gathered by Avian Science Center during standard 10-
minute point count survey with trained observers. See Avian Science Center website
for details on methodology at http://avianscience.dbs.umt.edu/

Table 2. Summary of Flammulated Owl Call survey efforts, owl, and other species detections on the
Hebgen Lake, Bozeman, Livingston, Big Timber, and Gardiner Ranger Districts in 2013 by the
Montana Natural Heritage Program.

Ranger

District

No. Call

Stations
Surveyed
Prior to 2013

No. Call

Stations
Surveyed in
2013

No.

Flammulated

Owl Detections

Across all Years

No. Owl
Species
Detected

in 2013

No. of other
Species
Detected in

2013

Total No. of

Animal

Observations

in 2013

Hebgen Lake

Bozeman

Livingston

Big Timber

Gardiner

Table 3. Species detected, and numbers of unique spatial observations, on the Big Timber, Gardiner,
Hebgen Lake, and Livingston Districts during 2013. Observations include those made during
the Flammulated Owl call surveys as well as those made incidentally whle in the area. The
table is sorted first by Montana Species of Concern (SOC) and Potential Species of Concern
(PSOC), then taxonomically. See Appendix A for Montana status and statre rank definitions.

Big Timber District

Montana

Status

Common Name

Scientific Name

State

Rank

Number of

Observations

Northern Saw-whet Owl

Aegolius acadicus

Gard

liner District

Montana

Status

Common Name

Scientific Name

State

Rank

Number of

Observations

Northern Rough-winged Swallow

Stelgidopteryx serripennis

S5B

American Robin

Turdus migmtorius

S5B

Warbling Vireo

Vireo gilvus

S5B

White-crowned Sparrow

Zonotrichia leucophrys

S5B

Hebgen Lake District

Montana

Status

Common Name

Scientific Name

State

Rank

Number of

Observations

SOC

Western Toad

Anaxyrus boreas

SOC

Great Blue Heron

Ardea herodias

SOC

Brewer's Sparrow

Spizella breweri

S3B

PSOC

Western Screech-Owl

Megascops kennicottii

S3S4

PSOC

Silver-haired Bat

Lasionycteris noctivagans

Boreal Chorus Frog

Pseudacris maculata

Osprey

Pandion haliaetus

S5B

Red-tailed Hawk

Buteo jamaicensis

S5B

Spotted Sandpiper

Actitis macularius

S5B

Wilson's Snipe

Gallinago delicata

Great Horned Owl

Bubo virginianus

Northern Saw-whet Owl

Aegolius acadicus

Common Nighthawk

Chordeiles minor

S5B

Calliope Hummingbird

Seiasphorus calliope

S5B

Northern Flicker

Colaptes auratus

Northern Rough-winged Swallow

Stelgidopteryx serripennis

S5B

Barn Swallow

Hi run do rustica

S5B

Mountain Chickadee

Poecile gambeli

Red-breasted Nuthatch

Sitta canadensis

Ruby-crowned Kinglet

Regulus calendula

S5B

Mountain Bluebird

Sialia currucoides

S5B

Swainson's Thrush

Catharus ustulatus

S5B

American Robin

Turdus migratorius

S5B

Cedar Waxwing

Bombycilla cedrorum

S5B

Warbling Vireo

Vireo gilvus

S5B

Yellow Warbler

Setophaga petechia

S5B

Yellow-rumped Warbler

Setophaga coronata

S5B

Western Tanager

Piranga ludoviciana

S5B

Chipping Sparrow

Spizella passerina

S5B

Vesper Sparrow

Pooecetes gramineus

S5B

Savannah Sparrow

Passerculus sandwichensis

S5B

Song Sparrow

Melospiza melodia

S5B

White-crowned Sparrow

Zonotrichia leucophrys

S5B

Dark-eyed Junco

Junco hyemalis

S5B

Western Meadowlark

Sturnella neglecta

S5B

Brown-headed Cowbird

Molothrus ater

S5B

Pine Siskin

Spinus pinus

Myotis Spp

Myotis Spp.

SNR

Big Brown Bat

Eptesicus fuscus

Red Squirrel

Tamiasciurus hudsonicus

Northern Pocket Gopher

Thomomys talpoides

Elk

Cervus canadensis

Terrestrial Gartersnake

Thamnophis elegans

Mourning Cloak

Nymphalis antiopa

Livingston District

Montana

Status

Common Name

Scientific Name

State

Rank

Number of

Observations

Great Horned Owl

Bubo virginianus

Common Nighthawk

Chordeiles minor

S5B

Appendix A.

Heritage Program Ranks:

Definitions for Global and State Conservation Status ranks and
Montana Species of Concern and Potential Species of Concern

Heritage Program Ranks

The international network of Natural Heritage Programs employs a standardized ranking system to denote global (range¬
wide) and state status. Species are assigned numeric ranks ranging from 1 to 5, reflecting the relative degree to which
they are "at-risk". Rank definitions are given below. A number of factors are considered in assigning ranks — the
number, size and distribution of known "occurrences" or populations, population trends (if known), habitat sensitivity,
and threat. Factors in a species' life history that make it especially vulnerable are also considered (e.g., dependence on a
specific pollinator).

Global Rank Definitions (NatureServe 2003 )

G1 Critically imperiled because of extreme rarity and/or other factors making it highly vulnerable to extinction
G2 Imperiled because of rarity and/or other factors making it vulnerable to extinction

G3 Vulnerable because of rarity or restricted range and/or other factors, even though it maybe abundant at some
of its locations

G4 Apparently secure, though it may be quite rare in parts of its range, especially at the periphery

G5 Demonstrably secure, though it may be quite rare in parts of its range, especially at the periphery

Tl-5 Infraspecific Taxon (trinomial) —The status of infraspecific taxa (subspecies or varieties) are indicated by a "T-
rank" following the species' global rank

State Rank Definitions

51 At high risk because of extremely limited and potentially declining numbers, extent and/or habitat,
making it highly vulnerable to extirpation in the state

52 At risk because of very limited and potentially declining numbers, extent and/or habitat, making it
vulnerable to extirpation in the state

53 Potentially at risk because of limited and potentially declining numbers, extent and/or habitat, even
though it may be abundant in some areas

54 Uncommon but not rare (although it may be rare in parts of its range), and usually widespread.
Apparently not vulnerable in most of its range, but possibly cause for long-term concern

55 Common, widespread, and abundant (although it may be rare in parts of its range). Not vulnerable in
most of its range

A-2

Combination Ranks

G#G# or S#S# Range Rank—A numeric range rank (e.g., G2G3) used to indicate uncertainty about the exact status of a
taxon

Qualifiers

NR Not ranked

Q Questionable taxonomy that may reduce conservation priority— Distinctiveness of this entity as a

taxon at the current level is questionable; resolution of this uncertainty may result in change from a
species to a subspecies or hybrid, or inclusion of this taxon in another taxon, with the resulting taxon
having a lower-priority (numerically higher) conservation status rank

X Presumed Extinct— Species believed to be extinct throughout its range. Not located despite intensive

searches of historical sites and other appropriate habitat, and virtually no likelihood that it will be
rediscovered

H Possibly Extinct— Species known from only historical occurrences, but may never-the less still be extant;

further searching needed

U Unrankable— Species currently unrankable due to lack of information or due to substantially conflicting

information about status or trends

HYB Hybrid— Entity not ranked because it represents an interspecific hybrid and not a species

? Inexact Numeric Rank— Denotes inexact numeric rank

C Captive or Cultivated Only— Species at present is extant only in captivity or cultivation, or as a

reintroduced population not yet established

A Accidental— Species is accidental or casual in Montana, in other words, infrequent and outside usual

range. Includes species (usually birds or butterflies) recorded once or only a few times at a location. A
few of these species may have bred on the one or two occasions they were recorded

Z Zero Occurrences— Species is present but lacking practical conservation concern in Montana because

there are no definable occurrences, although the taxon is native and appears regularly in Montana

P Potential— Potential that species occurs in Montana but no extant or historic occurrences are accepted

R Reported— Species reported in Montana but without a basis for either accepting or rejecting the report,

or the report not yet reviewed locally. Some of these are very recent discoveries for which the program
has not yet received first-hand information; others are old, obscure reports

SYN Synonym— Species reported as occurring in Montana, but the Montana Natural Heritage Program does

not recognize the taxon; therefore the species is not assigned a rank

* A rank has been assigned and is under review. Contact the Montana Natural Heritage Program for

assigned rank

B Breeding— Rank refers to the breeding population of the species in Montana

N Nonbreeding— Rank refers to the non-breeding population of the species in Montana

A-3

Montana Animal Species of Concern

Montana Animal Species of Concern are native Montana animals that are considered to be "at risk" due to declining
population trends, threats to their habitats, and/or restricted distribution. Montana Species of Concern are defined as
vertebrate animals with a state rank of SI, S2, or S3. Because documentation for invertebrates is typically less complete
than for vertebrates, only those ranked SI or S2 are included as SOC. Invertebrates with a range rank extending below
S2 (e.g., S2S3) are included as SOC only if their global ranks are G2G3 or G3, or if experts agree their occurrence in
Montana has been adequately documented.

Montana Animal Species of Potential Concern

Montana Potential Animal Species of Concern are animals for which current, often limited, information suggests
potential vulnerability or for which additional data are needed before an accurate status assessment can be made.
Vertebrate species with a rank indicating uncertainty (SU), a "range rank" extending below the S3 cutoff (e.g., S3S4), or
those ranked S4 for which there is limited baseline information on status are considered Potential Species of
Concern. Invertebrates of concern with global ranks other than Gl, G2, or G3 and with state ranks below S2 or range
ranks extending below S2 (e.g., S3S4) are treated as Potential Species of Concern.

A-4

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Flammulated owl surveys on the Big Timber, Bozeman, Gardiner, and Livingston Ranger Districts of the Custer Gallatin National Forest : 2013"

See other formats